The non-joint non-plan is still a non-joint non-plan.

IMG_2630I have had a response (Tuesday evening) from Defra to my request for information on the Hen Harrier Sub-group.

Most of it is a series of e-mails trying to fix dates for meetings but there are just a few interesting bits too.

The information will also be published on www.govuk – good luck to you if you can find it.

You’ll remember that the GWCT ‘launched’ an e-petition to muddy the waters on the subject of driven grouse shooting at the Game Fair back in July. They wanted Defra to publish the agreed plan straight away and claimed that it could have been published in January this year.

How strange then, that as late as 7 September the GWCT’s Chief Executive, Teresa Dent, was not asking Defra to publish the agreed plan but asking for ‘the latest version’ so that she could ‘make sure’ she was ‘working from the right version’.  Hardly the description of a document that is ready for publication. GWCT were just playing silly games with their e-petition.

Just in case you have any doubt about this (and, surely, you cannot) then the letter I received from Defra explains that:

We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosure of the draft minutes of the sub-group meeting held on 24 March 2014, the draft Joint Action Plan and the draft narrative as this would provide transparency in the process of workings of the sub-group. On the other hand, there is a strong public interest in withholding the information because these documents are working documents and therefore still subject to change, through discussion and agreement with all sub-group members. It is important that the sub-group members have time for further discussion on each of these draft documents to agree an appropriate way forward on a recovery plan to restore hen harrier populations in England and the messages they wish to convey. Therefore, we have concluded that the information currently in draft should be withheld. The minutes of the 24 March meeting will be signed off by the sub-group during its next meeting on 4 November. Please note that any subsequent request for information would be considered afresh.

I wouldn’t complain about that, but it is interesting that the minutes of a meeting of 24 March are not even agreed. And the non-joint non-plan is still (as of 28 October) ‘subject to change’.  This confirms that the draft Joint Action Plan is still a working document – or a non-joint non-plan as I have always described it.

However, in the same correspondence released to me by Defra, the Moorland Association describes the GWCT e-petition on the Government website as ‘An HM Government e-petition’ (e-mail from Amanda Anderson to Elaine Kendall of Defra dated 4 August) which also exhorts Moorland Association members to ‘Sign the HM Government e-Petition’.  Despite all these tricks with words, the e-petition for the non-joint non-plan has been a terrible flop.

Here’s an e-petition that is what it says it is – a request to the next government to ban driven grouse shooting.

 

 

 

 

[registration_form]

14 Replies to “The non-joint non-plan is still a non-joint non-plan.”

  1. I’m still annoyed with GWCT for trying to Hijack Hen Harrier Day with a Google Ad at the top of any search for Hen Harrier Day on the Day taking you to there webpage and linking to THEIR petition. When challenged on twitter they claimed “we are all on the same side.” All this after opening critising the RSPB for not supporting this non plan or course and claiming the RSPB were hurting Hen harriers by not doing so. Their actions sum them up really

    1. Rather like that difficult to identify in detail / locate contact details beyond electronic yftb bunch set up to bash RSPB & TWTs this bunch should be challenged over the inclusion of Conservation in their title?

      Selective conservation or what? Yes, I’m sure there are some of their memberships actions offering peripheral benefit to some species they are not at odds with & yes we all like Grey Partridges etc.

      1. Yes I challenged them on the inclusion of Conservation in their title, based on their pro badger cull and anti beaver reintroduction and they accused me of insulting their scientists hard work. Then told me I knew beaver reintroduction was “more complicated than that” when I asked them how they could be against something that would improve biodiversity. Funny I’ve never met anyone from GWCT so not sure how they know what know though I do know their facts page, on beaver reintroduction is full of very big holes!

        They have also responded to my comment on here on Twitter, rather than on here for some reason, so Ill save them the bother. It went as follows:

        “our Google Ad for Hen Harrier Day designed to raise awareness of Joint Recovery Plan – not mislead people. Ad text was clear.”

        Yes because placing a prominent advert at the top of every search for Hen Harrier Day that goes to the GWCT website and petition, rather than the official Hen Harrier Day website which is in no way misleading….

  2. Neil

    Just to set the record straight – the GWCT didn’t hijack Hen Harrier Day with a Google ad misleading people to the petition asking Defra to publish the Joint Recovery Plan. The ad contained the text ‘Would banning grouse shoots help?’ and asked people to download our free guide on Hen Harriers/Grouse Shooting (http://www.gwct.org.uk/grouse-shooting-hen-harriers-guide/). The advert was placed against search terms such as ‘hen harrier day’ because it was relevant to those people searching for terms such as these.

    Rob

      1. Neil

        The page the ad links to (it’s still there if you want to check) is for our guide, not the petition. You don’t think people interested in Hen Harrier Day would also be interested in learning more about the issues involved, including wildlife crime which is very much covered?

        Rob

        1. The GWCT’s Hen Harrier Google ads were an attempt to ‘control the message’ and insert the GWCT into a day of protests against a crisis caused by the very industry that they represent. Also, you were only allowed to download their ‘guide’ (PR sheet) if you signed up to the GWCT mailing list, ensuring that you would continue to receive a flow of similar propaganda.

          Across a range of lobbying groups, the shooting industry are working furiously to try to deflect attention away from the issue of raptor persecution, downplaying its significance and even smearing conservationists, which is very sad, in my opinion.

  3. Only one possible conclusion – no viable plan exists. The Con/Dems must be gratefulmthat the sands of time will run out before they actually have to face up to this one . But what will Labour say ? After all, they’ve already lost the Grouse shooting vote with the mansion tax.

  4. I used to think better of GWCT than I do now, I still usually disagreed with them but they seemed as if all was above board as it were. But this is rather typical of their recent activity and frankly they have joined the other idiots in the shooting lobby that think it is perfectly OK to lie, (that there was a plan was a lie), cheat and put their head in the sand (or somewhere closer to home and much less salubrious) rather than admit the truth about hen harrier in particular and raptor persecution in general. what this affair has done has put them firmly in the no credibility camp along with MA, NGO, SGA, SLE, Countryside Areliars, YFTB and sadly another organisation thats lost its compass BASC. Yet they still think we should trust them, eh! Lazywell, until something significant changes not a bloody chance.

  5. Sad to see GWCT and BASC strings being pulled into a non-evidence based PR led approach to conservation by their major funders. It must make their very competent scientists feel very uncomfortable indeed

  6. It is time that RSPB, WWT etc stopped co-operating with the so called GWCT and BASC. These groups are just front organisations for the lobby that wants to ensure that cruel sports are never banned. I wince when their representatives are rolled out on nature programmes and pretend to be lovers of wildlife. On the same programmes it is never explained to the audience what these groups really represent. Too many people in conservation are still in denial about these groups and cannot see that many of us want to protect wildlife for what it is, the thing itself and its intrinsic worth; not because it is a statistic or a resource for barbaric cruelty!

  7. Ollie

    Our guide is designed to help people learn more about the issue so they can make up their own mind based upon facts, figures and scientific findings. The purpose of Hen Harrier Day was, as I understand it, to help Hen Harriers. Much like the purpose behind the creation of a plan that involves several bodies including the RSPB. Mike Clarke (RSPB CEO) spoke at our conference last Wednesday and we are busy working together to finalise a plan that can help Hen Harrier numbers. Mike made the point that if everyone could just take a step back and breathe for a minute we could achieve more when it comes to issues such as these, and that means all sides.

    Rob

Comments are closed.